Introduction - Welcome to the University of Warwick · Web viewThis report provides information on...

Equality Monitoring Annual Report 2012 - 2013

October 2013

The University of Warwick. Equality Monitoring Annual Report 2012/13

Contents

1. Introduction........................................................................................................................42. Key facts and figures..........................................................................................................53. Gender profile....................................................................................................................7

3.1. Promoting Gender Equality.........................................................................................73.2. University Gender Profile............................................................................................83.3. University Gender Comparison...................................................................................93.4. Faculty Gender Profile..............................................................................................103.5. Conclusion.................................................................................................................14

4. Disability Profile..............................................................................................................144.1. Promoting Disability Equality...................................................................................144.2. University Disability Profile......................................................................................154.3. University Disability Comparison.............................................................................164.4. Faculty Disability Profile..........................................................................................184.5. Disabled Staff by Disability Types............................................................................214.6. Conclusion.................................................................................................................22

5. BME Profile.....................................................................................................................235.1. Promoting Race and Ethnicity Equality....................................................................235.2. University BME Profile.............................................................................................245.3. University BME Comparison....................................................................................255.4. Faculty BME Profile..................................................................................................265.5. University Ethnicity Profile.......................................................................................295.6. Conclusion.................................................................................................................32

6. Age Profile.......................................................................................................................336.1. Promotion of Age Equality........................................................................................336.2. University Age Profile...............................................................................................336.3. Conclusion.................................................................................................................34

7. Recruitment and Turnover Profile...................................................................................357.1. Recruitment Gender Profile.......................................................................................357.2. Recruitment BME Profile..........................................................................................377.3. Recruitment Disability Profile...................................................................................377.4. University Staff Turnover by Faculty........................................................................39

7.4.1. Female Staff Turnover by Faculty.....................................................................427.4.2. Disabled Staff Turnover by Faculty...................................................................45

2


7.4.3. BME Staff Turnover by Faculty........................................................................487.5. Conclusion.................................................................................................................51

8. Conclusion and Final Recommendations.........................................................................519. References........................................................................................................................53

3


1. Introduction

This report provides information on how the University of Warwick is meeting its responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010. The report is published with regard to the specific duty, under the Act, to publish equality information to demonstrate compliance with the three aims of the Equality Duty. As an employer, education provider and public body the University is committed to tackling discrimination and providing equal opportunities for everybody and strives to create a positive working environment of mutual respect and dignity.

Under the Equality Act 2010 the University has responsibility for carrying out its activities with respect to such facets as:

- Elimination of unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Equality Act 2010;

- Advancement of equality of opportunity between people from different groups, with or without protected characteristics;

- Foster good relations between people from different groups

The report presents statistical data applied in relation to the following protected characteristics: Gender; Disability; Ethnicity and Age. Information on staff turnover is also included. Data is provided in tabular and graphical format and any trends identified, which provide contextualisation and suggestions of possible recommendations for future improvements. Two new data collection sets are due to commence in 2013 – Religion and Belief and Sexual Orientation. Both collection sets have now been included in the personal monitoring form for new staff. For existing staff, the data will be requested as part of the data cleansing process exercise scheduled for December 2013.

At the census date of 01 September 2013, there were 5,350 employees working for the University. The data was taken from the University HR data base and has been broken down into 6 staff categories: Academic; Research only staff; Teaching only staff; Clinical1; Levels 1a-5 support staff; Levels 6-9 support staff and Other2. The report covers the following faculties:

Faculty of Arts Faculty of Medicine Faculty of Science Faculty of Social Sciences

1 The Clinical staff category are members of staff on clinical terms and conditions (separate to Academic terms and conditions). This category is predominantly made up of Levels 7, 8 and 9.

2 Here and further in the report category ‘Other’ represents staff not working on Warwick Terms and Conditions (e.g. TUPE transfer).

4


Administration

2. Key facts and figures

As of 01 September 2013 the profile of staff categories at Warwick is demonstrated in Figure 1. The overall number of employees is 5,350. The largest proportion of staff are employed in support roles, both in Levels 1a-5 (2,260 employees) and Levels 6-9 (1,0333 employees).

997

666

278

961,033

2,260

20

Distribution of the total number of employees

Academic

Research only staff

Teaching only staff

Clinical

Levels 6 to 9 support staff

Levels 1a to 5 support staff

Other

Figure 1. Distribution of the total number of employees

According to the data, the vast majority of employees are working on an indefinite contract basis (Figure 2). Generally, part-time employment is less prevelant with the exception of staff category Levels 1a-5 where almost half work part-time (Figure 3). Research only staff work mainly on fixed term contracts and are predominantly full-time. Full-time indefinite employment is predominant for Academic staff, Levels 6-9 and Levels 1a-5 support staff.

1,095

4,255

Distribution between fixed-term and open ended employees

Total Fixed Term

Total Open Ended

Figure 2. Distribution between fixed-term and open ended employees3 Figures are given by headcount, unless otherwise stated.

5


Fixed Term Full Time Open Ended Full Time Fixed Term Part Time Open Ended Part Time0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

Distribution of the staff categories among different employment types

Academic Research only staff Teaching only staffClinical Levels 6 to 9 support staff Levels 1a to 5 support staffOther

Figure 3. Distribution of the staff categories among different employment types

The overall picture is presented below in the University General Employee Profile (Table 1). As stated previously the largest number of employees are in Levels 1a-5 support roles, who work mainly on indefinite contracts in both full and part-time capacities. Levels 6-9 support staff also work mainly on indefinite contracts, with 723 staff working full-time and 172 part-time. Academic staff are predominantly full-time and on indefinite contracts – 886 out of total count of 997. In contrast, most research only staff have fixed-term contracts.458 work full-time and 103 part-time out of a total of 666 employees. Teaching only staff work mainly full-time on an open-ended basis – 134 out of total 278 staff (Table 1).

Table 1. General Employee Profile

University General Employee Working Pattern ProfileAcademic

Research only staff

Teaching only staff

Clinical



Other

Total Headcount TotalFull Time

Fixed Term

32 458 56 22 104 142 17 831

Indefinite 886 81 134 44 723 1,089 3 2,960Part Time

Fixed Term

21 103 40 16 34 50 264

Indefinite 58 24 48 14 172 979 1,295Total 997 666 278 96 1,033 2,260 20 5,350

There has been a general increase in the staff population employed by the University over the last few years as can be seen below:

6


According to the Higher Education Statistics Agency (2013)4, there are twice as many people working full-time (248,125) than part-time (130,125).

The increase in staff recruitment may be due to a number of factors, the Research Excellence Framework (REF) plus the growing reputation of Warwick both nationally and internationally.

3. Gender profile

3.1. Promoting Gender Equality

The University of Warwick supports gender equality and promotes gender equity in all of its activities.

The ECU Equality in Higher Education Statistical Report (2012) declares that generally there is a higher proportion of women than men for most occupational groups. However, they are mainly preoccupied in the traditionally female associated roles such as secretaries, typists, receptionists, nurses etc. In the academic field, the number of male professors is higher than females; moreover, there are twice as many male academics with higher salaries.

The ECU Report also states that there is a gender pay gap within the United Kingdom. There is a general increase of females in academic roles, to 44.2% in 20115. In addition, according to Office of National Statistics (September, 2013), the percentage of women in the UK in managerial roles is higher than the average in the European Union – 34.8% and 33.5% comparatively.

The University encourages and supports women’s employment across all categories of roles, ensuring that policies and processes are fair and transparent, whilst working hard to ensure equality of pay. During the equal pay review in 2011, an analysis of the gender pay disparities for professorial staff was compared to Russell Group market data for the same mix of academic disciplines as represented at Warwick. This indicated that Warwick is comparable to other Russell Group universities.

Warwick is a member of the Athena SWAN Charter, and is committed to the Charter’s values and principals. An Athena Steering Group, chaired by the Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research (Science and Engineering), Knowledge Transfer and Business Engagement was established in 2010. This group works in partnership with the University’s Athena Network Group (which has representation from all STEMM departments as well as central administrative 4 The latest data provided by Higher Education Statistics Agency (2013) is dated 2011-2012.5 The ECU report 2013 with the data about 2012 will be published in November 2013.

7

4,781 in 2011

4,943 in 2012

5,350 in 2013


staff). In September 2013, Warwick was awarded an Athena Institutional Silver Award for its proactive activities to support and encourage female participation in STEMM disciplines. It is Warwick’s strategy that any improvement in policies and processes is of benefit not only to women but to all employees.

There are many Athena initiatives that have helped to support women progress their STEMM careers and most of these initiatives have been shared as best practice with non STEMM departments. In addition the University provides a variety of support for employees returning from maternity/ adoption/paternity leave. The Learning and Development Centre offers a mentoring scheme for returning parents helping them to cope with balancing work responsibilities with family life. In addition, there is a Staff Network Group for Returning Parents.

3.2. University Gender Profile

The University’s total staff population is evenly balanced between female and male staff. Figure 4 shows the split - 2500 male and 2850 female employees, 46.7% and 53.3% respectively (Table 2). Gender representation has remained fairly static in recent years, (Equality Monitoring Report 2011, 2010, 2009). The percentage of females is not significantly below the average within the UK workforce population which is 53.7% (Equality Challenge Unit, 2012).

46.7%

53.3%

General gender representation

% Male

% Female

Figure 4. General gender representation

8


Table 2. University Gender Profile.

University Gender Profile on 01/09/2013Staff Category Total Headcount No.

Male% Male

No. Female

% Female

Academic 997 720 72.2% 277 27.8%Research only staff 666 389 58.4% 277 41.6%Teaching only staff 278 144 51.8% 134 48.2%Clinical 96 62 64.6% 34 35.4%Levels 6 to 9 support staff 1,033 442 42.8% 591 57.2%Levels 1a to 5 support staff 2,260 732 32.4% 1,528 67.6%Other 20 11 55.0% 9 45.0%Overall - Summary 5350 2500 46.7

%2850 53.3%

Total for 2012 4943 2269 45.9%

2674 54.1%

3.3. University Gender Comparison

The proportion of each gender varies by staff category. There are a higher number of female employees in support roles with 57.2% for Levels 6-9 and 67.6% for Levels 1a-5 staff. Academic roles together with Clinical remain prevalent with males – 72.2 % and 64.6%. The data shows that the proportion of academic male staff is slowly growing from 71.6% in previous years to 72.2 % in 2013. All other categories remain relatively equal (Table 2, Figure 5). This correlates with the Equality Challenge Unit Statistical Report (2012) information, which states the prevalence of women in support roles and dominance of men in academic positions.

Academic Research only staff

Teaching only staff

Clinical Levels 6 to 9 support

staff

Levels 1a to 5 support

staff

Other0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

120.0%

72.2%58.4% 51.8%

64.6%42.8%

32.4%55.0%

27.8%41.6% 48.2%

35.4%57.2%

67.6%45.0%

Gender distribution among different employee categories

% Female

% Male

Figure 5. Gender distribution among different employee categories.

The number of female employees dropped slightly in 2011 to 2,603 from 2,610 in 2010, then recovered showing a peak in this year with 2,850. This may be due to the general growth of staff numbers in all categories. As it has been already noted previously, the highest number of

9


female employees is within support roles Levels 1a-5 and 6-9. This is explained by the high concentration of roles traditionally associated with females, such as clerical, domestic and administration.

In previous years males predominated academic roles - approximately two and half times more than females. However, the number of female academics is starting to increase in comparison to the previous two years, from 261 in 2011 to 277 in 2013. Both Research and Teaching only staff have been relatively equal in terms of gender distribution. According to Table 3 and Figure 6, described trends have been persistent during recent years.

3.4. Faculty Gender Profile

The proportion of academic female roles in the Faculty of Science is the lowest compared to the other faculties. Teaching only staff are mainly represented by females (over 70 %) in the Faculty of Arts, Warwick Medical School and Administration*. There is high proportion of females occupied on Research only roles (about 65%) in the Faculty of Social Science, Warwick Medical School and Administration* (Fig.7).

* Due to the organisational system of the University, certain teaching departments fall into Administration, such as: Centre for Life Long Learning, Institute for Advanced Teaching and Learning, Institute for Advanced Study and the Language Centre. Therefore, Administration includes academic employees.

Administration Faculty of Arts Faculty of Science Faculty of Social Sciences

Warwick Medical School

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Proportion of academic roles occupied by females

Academic Research only staff Teaching only staff

Figure 6. Proportion of female employees on faculties

10


Table 3. University Gender Comparison

University Gender Comparison over time2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

Academic 599 252 685 270 679 268 664 268 642 265 617 261 646 257 720 277Research only staff 319 251 324 270 344 290 388 289 386 290 354 256 319 251 389 277Teaching only staff 78 70 82 94 91 95 96 91 99 92 103 103 124 114 144 134Clinical 41 15 50 16 50 20 56 23 52 30 59 31 64 31 62 34Levels 6 to 9 support staff 389 380 398 403 394 423 398 455 385 469 391 503 402 541 442 591Levels 1a to 5 support staff 627 1,453 661 1,481 655 1,518 671 1,479 659 1,439 656 1,430 699 1,462 732 1,528Other 72 65 76 63 62 55 38 29 28 25 15 19 16 19 11 9Summary 2,12

52,486

2,276

2,597

2,275

2,669

2,311

2,634

2,251

2,610

2,195

2,603

2,270

2,675

2,500

2,850

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

University Gender Comparison

AcademicResearch only staffTeaching only staffClinicalLevels 6 to 9 support staffLevels 1a to 5 support staffOther

Figure 7. University Gender Comparison

11


The data shows that the highest proportion of females roles in almost all the faculties are in Levels 1a-5 followed by Levels 6-9 support staff. Teaching only staff are represented by over 70% of females in Administration, Faculty of Arts and Warwick Medical School. The category ‘Other’ is represented only in Administration and Warwick Medical School with around 90% and 50% respectively. The lowest represented category is the Academic one with below 50 % around the faculties (Figure 8).

The percentage of females in Academic positions is 27.8% (Table 4, 5), which is almost half the average in the market – 44.2% (Equality Challenge Unit, 2012). Research and Teaching only positions have higher figures with 41.6% and 48.2% respectively. The proportion of women in support roles as it has been already mentioned is high presenting 57.2% in Levels 6-9 and 97.6% in Levels 1a-5. The departments with most representation of female employees are: Warwick Medical School – 64.7%, Administration – 64% and CCSG with 60.3% (Table 4, 5).

Administrati

on

Facu

lty of A

rts

Facu

lty of S

cience

Facu

lty of S

ocial S

cience

s

Warw

ick M

edical S

chool

GGSG0.0%

20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%

100.0%

Faculty Gender Profile: Females

Academic % Female Research only staff % FemaleTeaching only staff % Female Clinical % FemaleLevels 6 to 9 support staff % Female Levels 1a to 5 support staff % FemaleOther % Female

Figure 8. Faculty Gender Profile: Females

12


Table 4. Faculty Gender ProfileFaculty Gender Profile


Teaching only staff

Clinical Levels 6 to 9 support staff


Other Total Headcou

nt

Summary

No. Female

% Femal

e

No. Female

% Femal

e

No. Female

% Femal

e

No. Female

% Femal

e

No. Female

% Female

No. Female

% Female

No. Female

% Female

Administration 2 50.0% 16 66.7% 22 73.3% 308 66.4% 507 62.0% 8 88.9% 1,349 64.0%Faculty of Arts 69 43.1% 16 47.1% 17 70.8% 9 81.8% 31 88.6% 264 53.8%Faculty of Science

65 16.2% 108 26.9% 24 32.0% 0 0.0% 61 42.7% 153 59.5% 0 0.0% 1,287 31.9%

Faculty of Social Sciences

120 32.1% 53 64.6% 57 43.8% 93 69.4% 151 88.3% 0 0.0% 892 53.1%


21 36.8% 84 67.7% 14 73.7% 34 36.2% 51 83.6% 99 87.6% 1 50.0% 470 64.7%

CCSG 69 31.4% 587 67.8% 0 0.0% 1,088 60.3%Summary 277 27.8

%277 41.6

%134 48.2

%34 35.4

%591 57.2% 1,528 67.6% 9 45.0% 5,350 53.3%

Table 5. Detailed Faculty Gender Profile

Detailed Faculty Gender Profile

Academic Level 9

Academic Level 8

Academic Level 7

Research Only Teaching Only Clinical Levels 6 to 9 support staff


Other Total Headcoun

t

Summary

No. Fema

le

% Femal

e

No. Femal

e

% Femal

e

No. Femal

e

% Femal

e

No. Femal

e

% Femal

e

No. Femal

e

% Femal

e

No. Femal

e

% Femal

e

No. Femal

e

% Femal

e

No. Femal

e

% Femal

e

No. Femal

e

% Femal

eAdministration 0 0.0% 2 100.0

%0 0.0% 16 66.7% 22 73.3

%308 66.4% 507 62.0% 8 88.9

%1,349 64.0%

Faculty of Arts 18 31.6% 41 52.6% 10 41.7% 16 47.1% 17 70.8%

9 81.8% 31 88.6% 0 0.0% 264 53.8%

Faculty of Science

18 11.3% 35 20.8% 12 16.0% 108 26.9% 24 32.0%

0 0.0% 61 42.7% 153 59.5% 0 0.0% 1,287 31.9%


33 19.9% 55 42.6% 32 40.5% 53 64.6% 57 43.8%

93 69.4% 151 88.3% 0 0.0% 892 53.1%

Warwick 7 31.8% 8 30.8% 6 66.7% 84 67.7% 14 73.7%

34 36.2% 51 83.6% 99 87.6% 1 50.0%

470 64.7%

13


Medical SchoolCCSG 69 31.4% 587 67.8% 0 0.0% 1,088 60.3%

Summary 76 18.8%

141 35.0%

60 31.9%

277 41.6%

134 48.2%

34 35.4%

591 57.2%

1,528 67.6%

9 42.9%

5,350 53.3%

14


3.5. Conclusion

Whilst the University has an overall positive balance between male and female employees, there has been on-going under-representation of females amongst Academic staff. That also explains the overall gender distribution with females widely presented in support roles.

Taking into consideration the fact that many positions within the University could be occupied by people from the local community, it is rational to look into the gender split in Coventry. According to Coventry City Council (June, 2013), the population is equally divided. Females are more likely to work part-time (41.5%) and they are less likely to be in employment then men (60.6% of females in comparison to 71.5% of males). Support roles like Levels 1a-5 are highly likely to be occupied by members of the local population, working part-time (almost half) and there are 1.5 times more females.

Possible recommendations for consideration:

To continue and extend work aiming to encourage females to apply for jobs in the University.

To continue with the Athena SWAN Charter agenda and to encourage non-STEMM disciplines to investigate their policies and procedures with a view to submitting for the new Equality Challenge Unit’s Gender Equality Charter Mark which is due to be launched in October 2014.

To raise awareness of unconscious bias during recruitment activity. To raise awareness of opportunities and to ensure that staff understand the promotions

criteria by offering informative events and appropriate mentors. To promote the existing University training sessions, e.g. Equality & Diversity face to

face training sessions and the e-learning modules available to all staff and students. To engage with the local community and raise awareness of the University as a

potential employer.

4. Disability Profile

4.1. Promoting Disability Equality

The University acknowledges the equality of opportunity including job opportunities for disabled people with regards to the Department for Work and Pensions guidance (July 2013) and recommendations from Equality and Human Rights Commission (2013). The data indicates that the number of disabled staff employed is on an upwards trajectory, representing 3.3% (Table 6) of all staff. However, that still remains slightly below the proportion of disabled staff employed on average nationally, which is 3.7% (HESA, 2013) [3.2% (Equality Challenge Unit, 2012)].

15


According to the Equality Challenge Unit (2012), the number of employed disabled staff has been rising since 2003, reaching 3.2% this year. The report states that 2.6% of disabled staff work full time as academics and that the highest proportion of disabled staff are occupied in student welfare work, as careers advisors and related (4.9%) or cleaners, catering assistants, porters etc. (4.1%).

The University strives to ensure that all its facilities are accessible and supports all reasonable adjustments to ensure that disabled staff have the support they need to be able to fulfil their role.

4.2. University Disability Profile

Disabled staff are represented across all employee categories. According to the data, there is a greater proportion of females with reported disclosed disabilities than men - 1.9% and 1.4% respectively.

Females with disabilities are most pronounced amongst the Levels 1a-5, followed by Teaching only staff (2.2%) and Clinical (2.1%). The ‘Other’ category has 10% of disabled male employees, which is due to the low number of staff in that category. Disabled male staff are represented relatively equal among the other categories with the average percentage of 1.3%, the highest being 1.5% in Levels 1a-5 (Table 6, Figure 9).

In general, the proportion of disabled female employees decreased in comparison to the previous year from 2.1%, whereas the proportion of disabled males remained constant at 1.4% (Table 6).

Table 6. University Disability Profile

University Disability Profile

Staff Category Total Headcount

No. Male Declared Disabled

% Male declared disabled

No. Female declared disabled

% Female declared disabled

Academic 997 12 1.2% 9 0.9%Research only

staff666 7 1.1% 8 1.2%

Teaching only staff

278 4 1.4% 6 2.2%

Clinical 96 0 0.0% 2 2.1%Levels 6 to 9 support staff

1,033 14 1.4% 15 1.5%


2,260 34 1.5% 63 2.8%

Other 20 2 10.0% 0 0.0%Overall - Summary

5350 73 1.4% 103 1.9%

Total for previous year

4943 69 1.4% 105 2.1%

16


Aca-demic

Research only staff

Teaching only staff

Clinical Levels 6 to 9

support staff

Levels 1a to 5

support staff

Other0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

University Disability Profile

% Male declared disabled% Female declared disabled

Figure 9. University Disability Profile

4.3. University Disability Comparison

Over the period from 2006 to 2013 an increase has occurred in the number of both male and female disabled staff, progressing from 66 and 86 in 2006 to 73 and 104 respectively in 2013 (Table 7). The number of women with reported disabilities was constantly about 1.5 times higher. According to the data, during this time the majority of disabled staff are employed in support roles, predominantly in Levels 1a-5. There is a fairly stable proportion of disabled staff in the Academic category. The Research and Teaching only categories show constant fluctuation in numbers of disabled employees, but this is reflected by the fixed term contracts they may be employed on (Table 7, Figure 10).

Table 7. University Disability Distribution among different categories over time

University Disability Distribution among different categories over time2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M FAcademic 11 10 11 12 11 13 11 13 10 11 11 9 12 9 12 9Research only staff

4 8 6 7 7 8 10 9 9 10 9 7 4 9 7 8

Teaching only staff

3 0 4 1 5 2 6 3 6 3 5 2 4 3 4 6

Clinical 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 2Levels 6 to 9 support staff

11 11 11 12 9 15 9 14 9 14 10 15 11 12 14 15


33 56 35 61 34 65 37 65 36 63 38 62 36 70 34 64

Other 4 0 4 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 1 1 1 1 2 0Summary 66 86 71 94 69 104 77 10

574 10

275 97 69 105 73 10

4

17



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

University Disability Distribution among different categories over time

OtherLevels 1a to 5 support staffLevels 6 to 9 support staffClinicalTeaching only staffResearch only staffAcademic

Figure 10. University Disability Distribution among different categories over time

The number of disabled staff has been rising since 2006 from 152 reaching its peak of 182 in 2009, then after a small decline, stabilised at the relatively constant average of 175 (Table 8). The data shows a relatively large proportion of employees (5.2% on average) who have not disclosed their disability status. The number of staff choosing not to disclose a disability has been reducing with time, however, this year the proportion increased up to 5.6 % (Table 8, Figure 11).

Table 8. University Disability Comparison over time

University Disability Comparison over time2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Disabled 152 165 173 182 176 172 174 177No known disability 3,968 4,237 4,408 4,490 4,466 4,434 4,600 4,882Not disclosed 491 471 363 273 219 192 171 299Summary 4,611 4,873 4,944 4,945 4,861 4,798 4,945 5,358

18


2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

University Disability Comparison over time

Not disclosedNo known disabilityDisabled

Figure 11. University Disability Comparison

4.4. Faculty Disability Profile

Nationally there are on average 3% of academic staff with disclosed disabilities in non-SET departments and 2.3% in SET departments (Equality Challenge Unit, 2012). However, the University’s figures are 2.9% for non-SET and 1.5% for SET departments, making Warwick slightly under the national average.

Data shows that faculties have representation of disabled employees across different categories. The highest number of disabled staff work in Administration – 4.6%, followed by Faculty of Arts and CCSG with 4.2% and 3.9% respectively (Table 9, 10). The proportion of disabled employees among Academics is generally low – less than 2%, apart from Faculty of Arts, where 5.6% of employees are with reported disabilities (Figure 12, Table 9, 10).

Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences

CCSG Warwick Medical School

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

Faculty Disability Profile

Academic % Declared disabledResearch only staff % Declared disabledTeaching only staff % Declared disabledClinical % Declared disabledLevels 6 to 9 support staff % Declared disabledLevels 1a to 5 support staff % Declared disabledOther % Declared disabled

Figure 12. Faculty Disability Profile

19


Table 9. Faculty Disability Profile

Faculty Disability Profile


Teaching only staff Clinical Levels 6 to 9 support staff


Other

Tota

l He

adco

unt

Sum

mar

y

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y

%

Decla

red

disa

bilit

y

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y

%

Decla

red

disa

bilit

y

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y

%

Decla

red

disa

bilit

y

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y

%

Decla

red

disa

bilty

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y

%

Decla

red

disa

bilit

y

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y

%

Decla

red

disa

bilit

y

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y

%

Decla

red

disa

bilit

y

Administration 0 0.0% 1 4.2% 2 6.7% 16 3.4% 42 5.1% 1 11.1% 1,349 4.6%

Faculty of Arts 9 5.6% 1 2.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 2.9% 264 4.2%

Faculty of Science 6 1.5% 6 1.5% 1 1.3% 0 0.0% 5 3.5% 5 1.9% 1 16.7% 1,287 1.9%


5 1.3% 5 6.1% 6 4.6% 5 3.7% 6 3.5% 0 0.0% 892 3.0%

CCSG 3 1.4% 39 4.5% 0 0.0% 1,088 3.9%


1 1.8% 2 1.6% 1 5.3% 2 2.1% 0 0.0% 4 3.5% 0 0.0% 470 2.1%

Summary 21 2.1% 15 2.3% 10 3.6% 2 2.1% 29 2.8% 97 4.3% 2 10.0%

5,350 3.3%

20


Table 10. Detailed Faculty Disability Profile

Detailed Faculty Disability Profile on 01/09/2013

Academic Level 9

Academic Level 8

Academic Level 7

Research Only

Teaching Only



Other

Tota

l He

adco

unt

Sum

mar

y

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

No.d

ecla

red

disa

bilit

y%

De

clare

d di

sabi

lity

Administration 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 4.2% 2 6.7% 16 3.4% 42

5.1% 1 11.1% 1,349 4.6%

Faculty of Arts 3 5.3% 6 7.7% 0 0.0% 1 2.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 2.9% 0 0.0% 264 4.2%

Faculty of Science

3 1.9% 2 1.2% 1 1.3% 6 1.5% 1 1.3% 0 0.0% 5 3.5% 5 1.9% 1 16.7% 1,287 1.9%


1 0.6% 3 2.3% 1 1.3% 5 6.1% 6 4.6% 5 3.7% 6 3.5% 0 0.0% 892 3.0%


0 0.0% 1 3.8% 0 0.0% 2 1.6% 1 5.3% 2 2.1% 0 0.0% 4 3.5% 0 0.0% 470 2.1%

CCSG 3 1.4% 39

4.5% 0 0.0% 1,088 3.9%

Summary 7 1.7% 12

3.0% 2 1.1% 15 2.3% 10 3.6% 2 2.1% 29 2.8% 97

4.3% 2 9.5% 5,350 3.3%

21


4.5. Disabled Staff by Disability Types

A long standing illness or health condition is the most presented type of disability. There are also a number of employees with a specific learning difficulty – 24 people; and with physical impairment or mobility issues - 22 people (0.44% and 0.41% respectively). There is also a proportion of staff with disabilities unspecified in the list- 29 people (0.5%). According to the data, there is a stable increase in the number of employees with certain disability types, whereas some other disability types do not experience growth in numbers, for instance general learning disability, blind or a serious visual impairment uncorrected by glasses (Table 11, Figure 13). The dramatic increase in the number of employees with specific learning difficulties should be emphasised – from 8 to 24 within 7 years. That is in line with the Equality Challenge Unit (2012) statistics, noting 15% of staff with this disability type.

Table 11. University Disability Comparison by Disability Types

University Disability Comparison by Disability Types2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

No known disability 3,968 4,237 4,408

4,490 4,466

4,434 4,600 4,882

A specific learning difficulty 8 9 12 12 14 15 18 24General learning disability 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4A social/communication impairment 1 2A long standing illness or health condition

53 54 60 66 69 61 61 60

A mental health condition 7 8 9 10 10 10 13 14A physical impairment or mobility issues

18 19 20 21 23 23 24 22

Deaf or serious hearing impairment 13 14 16 17 17 20 18 18Blind or a serious visual impairment uncorrected by glasses

3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

A disability, impairment or medical condition that is not listed above

48 55 50 50 37 36 34 29

Question not answered 490 469 361 271 217 190 169 2971 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Summary 4,611

4,873

4,944

4,945

4,861

4,798

4,945

5,358

22


A specific lea

rning difficulty

General lea

rning disability

A social/communicati

on impairment

A long standing ill

ness or healt

h condition

A mental healt

h condition

A physical im

pairment or m

obility issu

es

Deaf or se

rious hearing im

pairment

Blind or a seri

ous visual im

pairment uncorrec

ted by glasse

s

A disability

, impairm

ent or medical

condition that is not lis

ted above

0

20

40

60

80University Disability Comparison by Disability Types

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Figure 13. University Disability Comparison by Disability Types

4.6. Conclusion

Overall, it could be inferred that in recent years there was a decline in the proportion of disabled employees with the increase in the general staff head count. The University has experienced an increase in the number of employees who are unwilling to disclose their disability status. According to Equality Challenge Unit (2012), 7.7% of disabled staff did not report their disability to employers. Therefore, this trend seems to be mirrored in the University statistics, with 5.6 % of employees choosing not to declare.

Mental health conditions are one of the wide-spread disabilities. According to the statistics, 1 out of 4 people around the UK experience some kind of mental health problem in the course of a year (Mental Health Foundation, 2013). Equality Challenge Unit (2012) states that 6.2% of staff in higher education generally reports mental health problems, whereas in the University the percentage is 0.26%. Being greatly below the average could indicate the unwillingness of employees to disclose their conditions.

Possible recommendations could be as follows:

23


To further research the reasons behind the unwillingness of people to disclose their disability status.

To raise awareness of disabilities and in particular mental health conditions to reduce the stigma associated with such disabilities.

To support staff with disabilities and to encourage them to share their success stories through internal publications and through information specifically sent to new and current staff on disclosure of a disability.

To raise disability awareness amongst staff and students.

5. BME Profile

5.1. Promoting Race and Ethnicity Equality

The University employs 658 employees with BME background which is equivalent to 12.3% of the total employee population. This is the highest proportion of BME employees that the University has employed to date and is substantially above the Higher Education sector average of 10.3% BME employees (Higher Education Statistics Agency (2013) and above the average of 7.2% of BME employed around the UK (ECU, 2012). The proportion of white staff is markedly high among UK national employees showing 92.8%, whereas the University presents a smaller figure of 82.5%. There are 1.5% black staff, 6.7% Asian (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, and other Asian background) and 2.1% Chinese employees.

The support staff population is predominately recruited from the local population and currently stands at 285 BME employees (43.3% of total BME staff). Equality Challenge Unit (2012) states that there are 6.5% UK BME and 3.3% non-UK BME staff occupied on professional and support roles around the country. According to Coventry City Council (September, 2013), the proportion of the BME in the area is 25.9% with the highest share of citizens with Asian or Asian British background – 15.1%. That might be the reason for the high proportion of this minority in the University staff population. At the same time, Black or Black British minority is represented in the area with 5.5% and Chinese being the least represented with 2.9%. According to Equality Challenge Unit (2012), there are 7.2% of BME UK national and 30.3% non-UK national employed currently around the country. Therefore, there is the potential workforce available to increase the proportion of BME employees within the University.

The University recruits an increasing proportion of its Academic staff from the internationalmarket. That diversifies the ethnic academic staff population and adds value to the University performance. As Equality Challenge Unit (2012) reports, there are 5.6% of UK BME academics and 6.8% of non-UK employed in general, showing potential for further development within University.

24


5.2. University BME Profile

BME staff are represented across different employee categories, presenting growth in numbers in recent years. The proportion between males and females of BME background - 5.8% and 6.5% respectively – goes in line with the general gender representation (Section 3.2). However, men are evenly distributed among different staff categories, whereas women are rather concentrated in certain ones. The proportion of females is higher in Levels 1a-5 support staff (8.8%) and ‘Other’ category (10%), whereas the academic related categories and particularly Clinical (20.8%) and research only staff category (12.3%) have higher proportions of BME males.

Table 12. University BME Profile

University BME Profile on 01/09/2013Staff Category Total Headcount No. Male BME % Male BME No. Female BME % Female BME

Academic 997 80 8.0% 43 4.3%Research only staff 666 82 12.3% 46 6.9%Teaching only staff 278 14 5.0% 13 4.7%Clinical 96 20 20.8% 8 8.3%Levels 6 to 9 support staff 1,033 28 2.7% 37 3.6%Levels 1a to 5 support staff 2,260 85 3.8% 200 8.8%Other 20 0 0.0% 2 10.0%Overall - Summary 5350 309 5.8% 349 6.5%Total for previous year 4943 280 5.7% 311 6.3%


Teaching only staff


staff

Levels 1a to 5

support staff

Other0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

University BME Profile

% Male BME% Female BME

Figure 14. University BME Profile

5.3 University BME Comparison

25


The number of BME employees has been growing constantly with time, showing a prevalence of females over males (Table 13). However, the distribution of the male-female staff follows the general trend described in Section 3.3. The majority of BME females are occupied in support roles in Levels 1a-5, to a lesser extent presented in research and academic categories, whereas the proportion of BME males is stable in the same categories (Table 13, Figure 15).

The growth in numbers is particularly pronounced amongst academic staff, with the number of BME academics increasing from 65 (44 males and 21 females) in 2006 to 123 (80 males and 43 females) in 2013. Although the number almost doubled, in general there are twice as many males as females in academic positions. The most common positions for BME staff still remain in roles at Levels 1a-5.

Table 13. University BME Comparison

University BME Comparison

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

Academic

44 21 55 27 61 28 62 33 63 34 59 37 72 34 80 43

Research only staff

63 30 62 42 72 49 85 44 83 40 74 42 66 42 82 46

Teaching only staff

3 4 4 4 7 5 7 8 9 10 11 8 12 10 14 13

Clinical 10 1 14 1 12 5 18 6 17 6 21 6 22 6 20 8Levels 6 to 9 support staff

26 18 27 16 23 20 29 24 24 28 24 30 27 35 28 38


34 147

44 163

57 176

60 171

64 173 70 168

81 182

85 200

Other 7 6 9 7 8 8 6 6 1 2 0 2 0 2 0 2Summary

187

227

215

260

240

291

267

292

261

293

259

293

280

311

309

350

26



0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

University BME Comparison

Academic Research only staff Teaching only staffClinical Levels 6 to 9 support staff Levels 1a to 5 support staffOther

Figure 15. University BME Comparison

5.3. Faculty BME Profile

A large proportion of BME staff are located in Warwick Medical School with 19.8%, followed by the Faculty of Science with 14.1% and CCSG with 13.3% (Table 14). The Faculty of Science has 50% of Clinical BME staff which is 12 employees, this is due to the low number of people working there.

The Faculty of Arts has the lowest proportion of the BME with only 5.3%. The senior administrative roles (Levels 6-9) occupied by BME are accounted for 6.3% (Table 14, Figure 16). The biggest proportion of BME is in academic Level 7 (23.4%), being represented in all faculties. The lowest BME representative proportion is in Professorial roles with only 7.7% overall (Table 15, Figure 17).

According to the Equality Challenge Unit (2012), the proportion of black academics who are professors is lower than any other ethnic group - 3.7% UK national and 2.3% non-UK National.

27


Table 14. Faculty BME Profile

Faculty BME Profile on 01/09/2013


Teaching only

staff


support staff


staff

Other

Tota

l Hea

dcou

nt

Sum

mar

y

No. B

ME

% B

ME

No. B

ME

% B

ME

No. B

ME

% B

ME

No. B

ME

% B

ME

No. B

ME

% B

ME

No. B

ME

% B

ME

No. B

ME

% B

ME

Administration

0 0.0%

7 29.2%

5 16.7%

19

4.1%

98 12.0%

2 22.2%

1,349

9.7%

Faculty of Arts

8 5.0%

2 5.9%

1 4.2%

0 0.0%

3 8.6%

264 5.3%

Faculty of Science

49 12.2%

83 20.6%

10

13.3%

1 50.0%

12

8.4%

27 10.5%

0 0.0%

1,287

14.1%


58 15.5%

7 8.5%

10

7.7%

6 4.5%

12 7.0%

0 0.0%

892 10.4%

CCSG 17

7.7%

128

14.8%

0 0.0%

1,088

13.3%


8 14.0%

29 23.4%

1 5.3%

27 28.7%

11

18.0%

17 15.0%

0 0.0%

470 19.8%

Summary

123

12.3%

128

19.2%

27

9.7%

28 29.2%

65

6.3%

285

12.6%

2 10.0%

5,350

12.3%

28


Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Faculty BME Profile

Academic % BMEResearch only staff % BMETeaching only staff % BMEClinical % BMELevels 6 to 9 support staff % BMELevels 1a to 5 support staff % BMEOther % BME

Figure 16. Faculty BME Profile

29


Table 15. Detailed Faculty BME Profile

Detailed Faculty BME Profile

Academic Level 9 Academic Level 8 Academic Level 7 Total HeadcountNo. BME % BME No. BME % BME No. BME % BME

Administration 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1,349Faculty of Arts 2 3.5% 3 3.8% 3 12.5% 264Faculty of Science 11 6.9% 22 13.1% 16 21.3% 1,287Faculty of Social Sciences 18 10.8% 19 14.7% 21 26.6% 892Warwick Medical School 0 0.0% 4 15.4% 4 44.4% 470CCSG 1,088Summary 31 7.7% 48 11.9% 44 23.4% 5,350

Admin

istra

tion

Facu

lty o

f Art

s

Facu

lty o

f Scie

nce

Facu

lty o

f Socia

l Scie

nces

War

wick

Med

ical S

chool

CCSG0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Detailed Faculty BME Profile

Academic Level 9 % BMEAcademic Level 8 % BMEAcademic Level 7 % BMEResearch Only % BMETeaching Only % BMEClinical % BMELevels 6 to 9 support staff % BMELevels 1a to 5 support staff % BMEOther % BME

Figure 17. Detailed Faculty BME Profile

30


5.5 University Ethnicity Profile

The vast majority of the University workforce is white – 82.5%. The following most populated group is Asian or Asian British - Indian (4.6%), Other ethnic background (4.5%), Chinese (2.1%) and other Asian background group (1.3%). There are 1.7% black employees (black or black British – Caribbean, Africa and other black background). The majority of BME are occupied in Levels 1a-5 support roles with 42.2%, with the biggest proportion of White and Indian ethnicity groups. Currently the University does not hold ethnicity information for 5.2% of all staff – 1.4% refused to declare and 3.8% of respondents did not answer the question (Table 16, 17, Figures 18, 19).

82.5%

1.7% 4.6%

2.1%4.5%

1.4% 3.8%

University Ethnicity Profile

WhiteBlack Asian or Asian British - IndianChineseOther ethnic backgroundPrefer not to sayNot Known

Figure 18. University Ethnicity Profile

31


Table 16. University Ethnicity Profile

University Ethnicity Profile on 01/09/2013% Ethnicity Academi

cResearch only staff

Teaching only staff

Clinical



Other Summary

White 15.0% 9.4% 4.3% 1.2% 17.3% 35.0% 0.3% 82.5%Arab 0.0% 0.0% 0.1%Black or Black British - Caribbean

0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.3% 0.0% 0.5%

Black or Black British - African

0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.6% 1.0%

Other Black background

0.0% 0.1% 0.2%

Asian or Asian British - Indian

0.6% 0.7% 0.1% 0.3% 0.6% 2.2% 4.6%

Asian or Asian British - Pakistani

0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.4% 0.7%

Asian or Asian British - Bangladeshi

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1%

Chinese 0.6% 0.7% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2% 0.5% 0.0% 2.1%Other Asian background

0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.6% 1.3%

Mixed - White and Black Caribbean

0.0% 0.1% 0.1%

Mixed - White and Black African

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1%

Mixed - White and Asian

0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.3%

Other mixed background

0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.6%

Other ethnic background

0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.6%

Prefer not to say 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 1.4%Not Known 0.9% 0.4% 0.3% 0.1% 0.5% 1.6% 0.1% 3.8%Summary 18.6% 12.4% 5.2% 1.8% 19.3% 42.2% 0.4% 100.0%

NB: Figures shown above are calculated as a percentage of the total university population.

32


Table 17. University Ethnicity Profile in numbers

University Ethnicity Profile in numbers on 01/09/2013

No. emps for ethnic origin

Academic

Research only staff

Teaching only staff

Clinical



Other

Summary

White 803 501 229 65 928 1,873 15 4,415Arab 1 2 3Black or Black British - Caribbean

1 4 1 4 17 1 28

Black or Black British - African

6 5 2 2 5 33 53

Other Black background

2 7 9

Asian or Asian British - Indian

33 37 6 18 31 120 245

Asian or Asian British - Pakistani

5 10 2 4 19 40

Asian or Asian British - Bangladeshi

1 2 1 1 5

Chinese 33 38 4 2 10 25 1 113Other Asian background

17 11 4 2 33 67

Mixed - White and Black Caribbean

1 7 8

Mixed - White and Black African

1 1 1 3

Mixed - White and Asian

5 3 1 1 3 2 15

Other mixed background

11 7 1 1 2 11 33

Other ethnic background

6 9 3 1 5 9 33

Not Known 50 24 14 3 29 84 3 207Prefer not to say 22 13 9 11 18 73Summary 997 666 278 96 1,033 2,260 20 5,350

NB: Figures shown above are calculated as a percentage of the total university population.

33



Teaching only staff


support staff

Levels 1a to 5

support staff

Other0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

University Ethnicity Profile WhiteArabBlack or Black British - Car-ibbeanBlack or Black British - AfricanOther Black backgroundAsian or Asian British - IndianAsian or Asian British - PakistaniAsian or Asian British - BangladeshiChineseOther Asian backgroundMixed - White and Black CaribbeanMixed - White and Black AfricanMixed - White and AsianOther mixed backgroundOther ethnic backgroundPrefer not to say

Figure 19. University Ethnicity Profile

5.4. Conclusion

Whilst the University’s BME staff population is the highest it has ever been and above the national HE sector average, in comparison to the overall number of the workforce, it is still relatively low, with the workforce being predominantly white. There is a particular underrepresentation of employees from a black background.

Coventry City Council (September, 2013) has reported, that the percentage of unemployment among the BME population in Coventry is around 15%, and that it is higher in comparison to the white population – 6%.

34


Recommendations:

To further research the reasons why individuals choose not to disclose their ethnicity. To ensure there are no biases while advertising vacancies, during the interviewing

process and employment. To engage with local people to encourage them to apply for jobs, taking into

consideration the rate of unemployment in the surrounding area.

6. Age Profile

6.1. Promotion of Age Equality

Due to the removal of the national default retirement age in October 2011 (GOV UK, July 2010), there is no upper limit on the age of job applicants for the majority of posts. This could account for the increase in age group 65+ in comparison to the previous year – 76 to 105 employees.

Coventry City Council (June, 2013) states, that a significant proportion of the population in the city is young with the highest percentage between 15 and 30 years, with the highest number (9.7%) in the age bracket 20-24. The most popular category of the staff of this age is within Levels 1a-5.

6.2. University Age Profile

The majority of employees at the University are between 26 and 55 years: there are 1408 in the 26 to 35 age category, 1415 36 to 45 age category, 1416 in 46 to 55 age category. For the academic category the most employed age is 36-45 and 46-55 with 330 and 317 employees respectively. There are more employees of a younger age range from 26 to 35 are occupied in research only roles (363 employees), followed by the age group 36 and 45 – 153. For Levels 6-9 support staff the most common age range is 36-45, and for Levels 1a-5 it is 26-35 and 46-55. Apart from the Levels 1a-5 support staff, the proportion of the employees younger than 25 is very low. The lowest proportion of employees is the age range 65+, which is higher than it was in previous years (Table 18, Figure 20).

The national age profile (Office of National Statistics, June 2013) appears to be younger in comparison to the University staff population. According to the Office of National Statistics (2013), employment rates by age is 82% of the age 35- 49 followed by 79% from 25 to 34 years. Therefore, the University shows better results employing younger staff (26.3% out of total staff) with slight insignificant difference from the older age group.

35


Table 18. University Age Profile

University Age Profile on 01/09/2013Total Headcount <25 26 - 35 36 - 45 46 - 55 56 - 65 65+ Total

Academic 166 330 317 155 29 997Research only staff 16 363 153 79 37 18 666Teaching only staff 1 59 63 88 52 15 278Clinical 17 30 30 18 1 96Levels 6 to 9 support staff 13 255 357 272 130 6 1033Levels 1a to 5 support staff 143 548 479 628 426 36 2260Other 15 3 2 20Total 188 1408 1415 1416 818 105 5350


Teaching only staff


staff


staff

Other0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

University Age Profile

65+ 56 - 6546 - 5536 - 4526 - 35<25

Figure 20. University Age Profile

6.3. Conclusion

In general, there are no significant concerns about the distribution of the age ranges of employees in the University. That may be due to the research orientation of the organisation where early career staff have a valid entry point as post-doctoral staff.

However, new regulations regarding national default retirement age might have an effect on the landscape of the employee population (GOV UK, July 2010).

Recommendations:

To continue encouraging younger employees to enter the organisation.

36


To offer staff a “planning for your retirement” programme to include advice and support on financial planning.

7. Recruitment and Turnover Profile

This section provides information on staff recruitment and turnover with regards to gender, BME and disability. The data presents the situation with staff turnover during the 2011-2012 academic year, since information during 2012-2013 will not available until the end of 2013.

7.1. Recruitment Gender Profile

There were 16,949 applications during the year (2011-2012) for 924 vacancies, with almost half of the applicants being women – 7600 (44.84%). 10.21% of female candidates and 10.09% male candidates were shortlisted, with 3.38% and 3.28% receiving a final offer respectively. That indicates a fair balance between candidates of different genders during the recruitment process (Table 19).

Turning to the faculty analysis, the most popular faculty for applications was the Faculty of Science with 5457 applicants. However, the proportion of female applicants was low at 36.36% (1984). The proportion of shortlisted candidates is 8.82% of females to 11% of males, with the final offer to 2.82% and 3.05% respectively. Although there is a larger proportion of male employees, the final difference between males and females employed is not significant. The faculty with the least applications number is the Faculty of Arts with 1744. The highest amount of applicants approved for jobs were within Warwick Medical School – 9.95% in total.

The highest proportion of female applicants who received offers of employment was for Warwick Medical School with 4.59% and for Administration with 4.04%. The latter together with Faculty of Arts and Faculty of Social Science have the largest percentage of female applicants with final offers over males – 2.25% and 3.14% respectively (Table 19).

37


Table 19. Recruitment Gender Profile

Faculty

No.

ap

plic

atio

ns

No.

sho

rtlis

ted

No.

offe

red

No.

fem

ale

appl

icat

ions

No.

mal

e ap

plic

atio

ns

% A

pplic

ants

w

ho w

ere

fem

ale

No.

Fem

ale

shor

tlist

ed

% o

f fem

ale

appl

ican

ts

who

wer

e sh

ortli

sted

% o

f mal

e ap

plic

ants

w

ho w

ere

shor

tlist

edN

o. fe

mal

e of

fere

d

% o

f fem

ale

appl

ican

ts

who

wer

e

% o

f mal

e ap

plic

ants

w

ho w

ere

offe

red

Total for Faculty of Arts 1744 142 35 890 854 51.03% 77 8.65% 7.61% 20 2.25% 1.76%

Total for Warwick Medical School 1487 291 73 871 616 58.57% 163 18.71% 20.78% 40 4.59% 5.36%

Total for Administration 4839 423 193 2230 2609 46.08% 196 8.79% 8.70% 90 4.04% 3.95%

Total for Faculty of Science 5457 557 162 1984 3473 36.36% 175 8.82% 11.00% 56 2.82% 3.05%

Total for Faculty of Social Sciences

3422 306 101 1625 1797 47.49% 165 10.15% 7.85% 51 3.14% 2.78%

Total 16949 1719 564 7600 9349 44.84% 776 10.21% 10.09% 257 3.38% 3.28%

38


7.2. Recruitment BME Profile

With the total number of 340 BME applicants, or 7.35%, who were shortlisted, 1.69% were finally offered jobs. The highest number of applications were to the Faculty of Science with 144 people, which, however, was only 7.69% of the total amount of applicants. The highest proportion showed in Warwick Medical School with 16.14%, which amounts to 82 people. The School showed the highest percentage of BME candidates with final offer – 2.95%. However, that could be due to the fact that the School generally employ more people, showing the highest percentage for the non-BME as well. The lowest percentage of BME applicants who received an offer refer to the Faculty of Arts with less than 1% (Table 20).

7.3. Recruitment Disability Profile

The Faculty of Science has the highest number of disabled applicants, followed by Administration - 143 and 127 namely. The Faculty of Science has, as mentioned above, a high number of staff and that explains the large proportion. The share of disabled applicants is fairly equal among all the faculties with the average of 2.60%.

There are almost twice as many non-disabled candidates to receive job offers in Warwick Medical School – 2.78% to 4.96%. Administration shows the highest percentage of disabled applicants with final offers (4.72%). The balance between the disabled and non-disabled candidates with final job offers within the other faculties is fairly equal with the average of 2.95% disabled to 3.34% non-disabled candidates (Table 21). Overall, the figures are too small to draw any reasonable conclusions.

39


Table 20. Recruitment BME Profile

Faculty

No.

app

licat

ions

No.

sho

rtlis

ted

No.

offe

red

% o

f mal

e ap

plic

ants

who

w

ere

offe

red

No.

BM

E ap

plic

atio

ns

% a

pplic

ants

who

w

ere

BM

E

No.

BM

E sh

ortli

sted

% o

f BM

E ap

plic

ants

who

w

ere

shor

tlist

ed

% o

f non

-BM

E ap

plic

ants

who

w

ere

shor

tlist

ed

No.

BM

E of

fere

d

% o

f BM

E ap

plic

ants

who

w

ere

offe

red

% o

f non

-BM

E ap

plic

ants

who

w

ere

offe

red

Total for Faculty of Arts 1744 142 35 1.76% 168 9.63% 13 7.74% 8.19% 1 0.60% 2.16%Total for Warwick Medical School 1487 291 73 5.36% 508 34.16% 82 16.14% 21.35% 15 2.95% 5.92%

Total for Administration 4839 423 193 3.95% 1152 23.81% 59 5.12% 9.87% 23 2.00% 4.61%Total for Faculty of Science 5457 557 162 3.05% 1873 34.32% 144 7.69% 11.52% 28 1.49% 3.74%


3422 306 101 2.78% 925 27.03% 42 4.54% 10.57% 11 1.19% 3.60%

Total 16949 1719 564 3.28% 4626 27.29% 340 7.35% 11.19% 78 1.69% 3.94%

Table 21. Recruitment Disability Profile

Faculty No.

ap

plic

atio

ns

No.

sho

rtlis

ted

No.

offe

red

No.

dis

able

d ap

plic

atio

ns

% o

f ap

plic

ants

w

ho w

ere

disa

bled

No.

dis

able

d sh

ortli

sted

% o

f dis

able

d ap

plic

ants

w

ho w

ere

shor

tlist

ed

% o

f non

-di

sabl

ed

appl

ican

ts

who

wer

e

No.

Dis

able

d of

fere

d

% o

f dis

able

d ap

plic

ants

w

ho w

ere

offe

red

% o

f non

-di

sabl

ed

appl

ican

ts

who

wer

e of

fere

d

Total for Faculty of Arts 1744 142 35 41 2.35% 1 2.44% 8.28% 1 2.44% 2.00%Total for Warwick Medical School 1487 291 73 36 2.42% 5 13.89% 19.71% 1 2.78% 4.96%

Total for Administration 4839 423 193 127 2.62% 14 11.02% 8.68% 6 4.72% 3.97%Total for Faculty of Science 5457 557 162 143 2.62% 14 9.79% 10.22% 3 2.10% 2.99%


3422 306 101 94 2.75% 6 6.38% 9.01% 2 2.13% 2.97%

40


Total 16949 1719 564 441 2.60% 40 9.07% 10.17% 13 2.95% 3.34%

41


7.4. University Staff Turnover by Faculty

The percentage of the total staff turnover has risen in comparison with the previous year from 11.8% to 12.7%, together with voluntary turnover from 6.3% to 7.3%. The increase appears in almost all the staff categories. The jump is evident in particular in academics from 6.7% to 8.9%, Clinical staff from 15.1% to 19.3% and Levels 1a-5 from 8.9% to 11.2%. All the other categories show a minor rise in turnover level. The only category indicating a decrease is the Research only staff - from 32% to 28.8% (Table 22, Figure 21).

The majority of the faculties show that more than half of turnover is voluntary. However, the Faculty of Arts and Faculty of Science do not go along with the trend disclosing less than half of voluntary turnover. The highest turnover rate is declared by Warwick Medical School 16.9%, followed by the Faculty of Science 15.7% and the Faculty of Social Science with 14.4%. The lowest turnover rate is in CCSG with 9.3% (Table 22, Fig. 21).

Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

University Staff Turnover

Total turnover - AllTotal voluntary turnover

Figure 21. University Staff Turnover

Generally, research only staff remains the dominant category in the majority of the faculties in terms of the turnover rate with dominance in the Faculty of Science. Only the Faculty of Arts has a higher turnover in the teaching only staff with 50% in comparison to research staff with 20.7%. Warwick Medical School has relatively equal turnover rate in all the staff categories. The highest proportion of academic staff turnover is in the Faculty of Social Science (Table 22, Figure 22).

42


Administration

Faculty o

f Arts

Faculty o

f Science

Faculty o

f Social

Sciences

CCSG

Warwick

Medical Sch

ool

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

All Turnover - All Staff

Academic All Research only staff All Teaching only staff AllClinical All Levels 6 to 9 support staff All Levels 1a to 5 support staff AllOther All Total turnover - All

Figure 22. Faculty Staff Turnover

43


Table 22. University Staff Turnover by Faculty

University Staff Turnover by Faculty


Teaching only staff



Other

Leav

ers d

urin

g pe

riod

Tota

l tur

nove

r -

All

Tota

l vol

unta

ry

turn

overAll

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g

Administration

0.0% 0.0%

0 20.7%

20.7%

3 0.0%

0.0%

0 9.5%

6.9%

44 11.4%

8.1%

92 31.6%

0.0%

3 141 10.7%

7.5%

Faculty of Arts

5.2% 2.6%

8 27.6%

6.9%

8 50.0%

9.1%

11 21.1%

10.5%

2 5.7% 2.9%

2 0.0%

0.0%

0 31 12.4%

4.0%

Faculty of Science

5.6% 2.7%

21 33.5%

14.7%

123 4.5%

1.5%

3 0.0%

0.0%

0 5.9%

4.4%

8 15.3%

7.6%

38 7.7%

0.0%

1 190 15.7%

7.4%


14.5%

8.8%

51 21.1%

5.8%

18 19.9%

12.1%

23 12.5%

9.4%

16 7.5% 4.6%

13 0.0%

0.0%

2 123 14.4%

8.2%

CCSG 4.1%

3.6%

8 10.2%

6.8%

86 100.0%

0.0%

3 97 9.3% 6.2%


5.8% 1.9%

3 22.6%

10.0%

27 12.5%

6.3%

2 19.7%

14.2%

18 11.9%

10.2%

7 16.4%

10.9%

18 40.0%

40.0%

1 76 16.9%

10.2%

Summary 8.9%

4.9%

83 28.8%

12.3%

177 15.8%

7.3%

39 19.3%

13.9%

18 8.4%

6.3%

83 11.2%

7.3%

248 37.0%

3.7%

10 652 12.7%

7.3%

44


7.4.1. Female Staff Turnover by Faculty

The figures indicate that there are higher levels of turnover in the Faculty of Science and Warwick Medical School with 17.5% and 15.2% respectively, followed by the Faculty of Social Science with 14.3%. These faculties also show the largest differential between voluntary and all turnover with 9.7% and 6.4% difference, as well as the Faculty of Arts with 8.2%. All the other faculties appear to have a balanced voluntary turnover. The categories of staff with the highest female turnover are research only staff with 28.5% and ‘Other’ with 57.1% (Table 23, Figures 23, 24, 25). In general the turnover of research only staff is high due to the large number of fixed-term contracts, which also explains the high numbers in the females turnover in that category.

Although the highest percentage of the turnover appears to be in Warwick Medical School along with the ‘Other’ category, there was just one person to leave during the year. The Faculty of Arts has a high proportion of turnover of teaching only staff. Apart from that, the highest voluntary rate appears to be in research only staff in Administration6 and the Faculty of Science.

Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

Female Staff Turnover


Figure 23. Female Staff Turnover

6 As mentioned previously, Administration includes some academic departments, such as Centre for lifelong Learning, Language centre, etc.

45


Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Female Staff All Turnover by Faculty

Academic AllResearch only staff AllTeaching only staff AllClinical AllLevels 6 to 9 support staff AllLevels 1a to 5 support staff AllOther All

Figure 24. Female Staff All Turnover by Faculty

Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Female Staff Voluntary Turnover by Faculty

Academic VolResearch only staff VolTeaching only staff VolClinical VolLevels 6 to 9 support staff VolLevels 1a to 5 support staff VolOther Vol

Figure 25. Female Staff Voluntary Turnover by Faculty

46


Table 23. Female Staff Turnover by Faculty

Female Staff Turnover by Faculty


Teaching only staff Clinical Levels 6 to 9 support staff


Other

Tota

l tur

nove

r - A

ll

Tota

l vol

unta

ry

turn

overAl

l

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g pe

riod

All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g pe

riod

All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g pe

riod

All

Vol

Leav

ers All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g pe

riod

All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g pe

riod

All

Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g pe

riod

Administration

0.0%

0.0%

0 20.0%

20.0%

2 0.0% 0.0% 0 9.0%

5.7%

27 12.5%

9.5%

62 28.6%

0.0%

2 11.1% 7.8%

Faculty of Arts

1.5%

1.5%

1 25.8%

6.5% 4 46.7%

6.7% 7 26.7%

13.3%

2 6.5% 3.2%

2 0.0% 0.0%

0 11.9% 3.7%

Faculty of Science

1.7%

0.0%

1 42.7%

17.1%

45 0.0% 0.0% 0 6.8%

5.1%

4 14.2%

6.8%

21 0.0% 0.0%

1 17.5% 7.8%


18.0%

10.3%

21 17.9%

5.4% 10 20.0%

10.0%

10 14.4%

10.0%

13 7.2% 5.2%

11 0.0% 0.0%

2 14.3% 7.9%

CCSG 6.2%

6.2%

4 8.5% 5.2%

49 0.0% 0.0%

2 8.6% 5.3%


9.5%

4.8%

2 20.1%

7.5% 16 16.7%

8.3% 2 18.5%

9.2%

6 12.4%

10.3%

6 11.6%

8.4%

11 66.7%

66.7%

1 15.2% 8.6%

Summary 9.5%

5.3%

25 28.5%

11.3%

76 16.0%

5.9%

19 18.5%

9.2%

6 9.7%

6.7%

55 10.4%

6.9%

156

57.1%

7.1%

8 12.3% 7.1%

47


7.4.2. Disabled Staff Turnover by Faculty

According to the figures, the highest turnover level is in Warwick Medical School, followed by CCSG (22.7%). The former has large differential between voluntary and all turnover with 26.1% and 8.7% respectively. In the Faculty of Science the voluntary turnover is 0.0% with all turnover being 8.7%. However, the number is low – 2 people in research only staff. Levels 1a-5 present 22.4% of all turnover with half being voluntary. Clinical staff show one person creating 50% of the all turnover (Table 24, Figures 26, 27, 28).

Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Disabled Staff Turnover


Figure 26. Disabled Staff Turnover

Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Disabled Staff All Turnover by Faculty


Figure 27. Disabled Staff All Turnover by Faculty

48


Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Disabled Staff Voluntary Turnover by Faculty


Figure 28. Disabled Staff Voluntary Turnover by Faculty

49


Table 24. Disabled Staff Turnover by Faculty on 1st Sep 2013

Disabled Staff Turnover by Faculty


Teaching only staff



Other

Tota

l tur

nove

r -

All

Tota

l vol

unta

ry

turn

over

All Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g

All Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g

All Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g

All Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g

All Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g

All Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g

All Vol

Leav

ers

durin

g

Administration

0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0%

0.0%

0 6.9%

0.0%

1 27.0%

15.7%

12 0.0%

0.0% 0 21.0% 11.3%

Faculty of Arts

0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0%

0.0%

0 100.0%

100.0%

1 10.0% 10.0%

Faculty of Science

0.0%

0.0%

0 36.4%

0.0%

2 0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%

0.0% 0 8.7% 0.0%


40.0%

20.0%

2 0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%

0.0% 0 7.7% 3.8%

CCSG 28.6%

28.6%

1 22.2%

12.3%

9 0.0%

0.0% 0 22.7% 13.6%


0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0%

0.0%

0 50.0%

0.0%

1 0.0%

0.0%

1 20.0%

0.0% 1 0.0%

0.0% 0 26.1% 8.7%

Summary 9.8%

4.9%

2 12.9%

0.0%

2 0.0%

0.0%

0 50.0%

0.0%

1 11.5%

7.7%

3 22.4%

12.7%

23 0.0%

0.0%

0 17.6% 9.1%

50


7.4.3. BME Staff Turnover by Faculty

The same trends are relevant to BME staff turnover: high turnover rate in the Faculty of Science with two times differential between the voluntary (12%) and all turnover (26.5%). The Faculty of Arts does not have voluntary turnover, and it is only within the teaching category, amounting to two people. In the Faculty of Science it is research only staff and in the Faculty of Social Science it is teaching only staff that are prevalent over all the other turnover rates, presented with over 30%. The latter appears to be voluntary turnover. Another high category is clinical with 22.2% (Table 25, Figures 29, 30, 31).

Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

BME Staff Turnover


Figure 29. BME Staff Turnover

Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

BME Staff All Turnover by Faculty


Figure 30. BME Staff All Turnover

51


Adminis-tration

Faculty of Arts

Faculty of Science

Faculty of Social

Sciences


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

BME Staff Voluntary Turnover by Faculty


Figure 31. BME Staff Voluntary Turnover

52


Table 25. BME Staff Turnover by Faculty

BME Staff Turnover by Faculty


Teaching only staff



Other

Tota

l tur

nove

r - A

ll

Tota

l vol

unta

ry

turn

over

All Vol

Leav

ers d

urin

g pe

riod

All Vol

Leav

ers d

urin

g pe

riod

All Vol

Leav

ers d

urin

g pe

riod

All Vol

Leav

ers d

urin

g pe

riod

All Vol

Leav

ers d

urin

g pe

riod

All Vol

Leav

ers d

urin

g pe

riod

All Vol

Leav

ers d

urin

g

Administration

0.0%

0.0% 0 0.0%

0.0%

0 5.3% 5.3% 1 15.1%

12.9%

14 0.0%

0.0%

0 12.2% 10.6%

Faculty of Arts

0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0%

0.0% 0 100.0%

0.0%

2 0.0%

0.0%

0 18.2% 0.0%

Faculty of Science

9.4%

4.7%

4 43.1%

19.6%

33 0.0%

0.0%

0 0.0% 0.0% 0 32.0%

16.0%

4 11.3%

3.8%

3 0.0%

0.0%

0 26.5% 12.0%


12.5%

7.1%

7 11.8%

11.8%

1 33.3%

22.2%

3 16.7%

0.0% 1 8.0%

8.0%

1 0.0%

0.0%

0 14.1% 8.7%

CCSG 0.0% 0.0% 0 14.3%

11.1%

18 0.0%

0.0%

0 12.7% 9.9%


0.0%

0.0%

0 17.5%

7.0% 5 0.0%

0.0%

0 23.1%

19.2%

6 9.1% 9.1% 1 7.4%

7.4%

1 0.0%

0.0%

0 14.9% 10.3%

Summary

9.8%

5.4%

11 33.1%

15.3%

39 21.7%

8.7%

5 22.2%

18.5%

6 10.9%

6.2%

7 13.5%

10.6%

37 0.0%

0.0%

0 16.9% 10.3%

53


7.5. Conclusion

The turnover is mainly caused by fixed term contracts, as for instance, with the research only staff category. The high rate of turnover on the Faculty of Science is provided by the large number of staff employed overall. Due to the small number of disabled staff it is hard to draw any valid conclusions about the turnover.

Recommendations:

To undertake additional research in order to identify the reasons behind the turnover rate.

To examine what percentage of employees move to positions within the university as career progression.

8. Conclusion and Final Recommendations

The University of Warwick has a longstanding commitment to the promotion of equality and undertakes a wide range of activities to promote diversity and meet the needs of different groups of staff. Overall, it could be inferred that a good balance of a diverse workforce has been maintained in the last year and certain improvements have been reached.

The work of the University in promoting equality is evidence-based and underpinned by consultation with staff. The analysis of the data gives the realistic picture of the situation and helps to find the best ways to work with it. Based on the analysis conveyed in this report, the recommendations could be as follows:

To continue work in increasing the level of understanding and awareness among employees about equality and diversity. That includes the promotion of equality of opportunity and diminishing any biases towards groups of people with protected characteristics. That could be done through special leaflets, publications of success stories, workshops or trainings.

To promote the continued commitment of the University towards equality and diversity

o To increase the University’s presence in the relevant media sources;o Active participation in the relevant surveys and officially refer to them; o Develop detailed and coherent presentation of the University’s policy and

actions on the official web-page. To develop the process of recruitment in order to ensure that no biases have influence

on the candidates selection. To continue and expand interaction with the relevant organisations such as Athena

SWAN.

54


To develop the Corporate Social Responsibility activities. That includes close cooperation with the local community, supporting the people from the local areas in applying for jobs within the University, involvement in other related activities.

To develop and maintain the Equality Objectives 2011-2015 in order to establish the formal plan of the equality situation development.

To continue regular analysis of data to monitor changes in the situation. During the data cleansing process the message relating to disclosure of disability and

ethnicity will be reinforced. From 2013/14 we will be able to report on Religion and Belief and Sexual

Orientation.

Being successful in further developing of the good environment of equality and diversity, the University will strengthen its image of the reliable and responsible employer with a proactive attitude. The promotion and positioning of the University policies will attract more potential candidates of the protected characteristics who will feel confident to apply for jobs at the University. Moreover, their adaptation at the workplace will be smoother and less stressful, which has long-lasting consequences. First of all, that establishes the psychological contract and builds the loyalty of the employee towards the organisation. Second, that establishes the positive atmosphere within the University because of the organisation’s involvement in the employees’ well-being.

55


9. References

Coventry City Council. (September, 2013). Coventry People and Race and Ethnicity. Retrieved from: http://www.coventry.gov.uk/downloads/file/4639/coventry_people_and__race_and_ethnicity

Coventry City Council. (June, 2013). Coventry People and Race and Gender. Retrieved from: http://www.coventry.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/4635/coventry_people_and__gender_sex

Coventry City Council. (June, 2013). Coventry People and Race and Age. Retrieved from: http://www.coventry.gov.uk/downloads/file/4633/coventry_people_and__age

Department for Work and Pensions. (July 2013). Guidance: Employing disabled people and people with health conditions. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/employing-disabled-people-and-people-with-health-conditions/employing-disabled-people-and-people-with-health-conditions

Equality and Diversity Training. (June 2012). Equality & Diversity training on prejudices and discrimination. Retrieved from: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/insite/news/intnews2/equality_diversity_training_aug12

Equality and Human Rights Commission. (2013). Disability. Retrieved from: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/advice-and-guidance/your-rights/disability/

Equality Monitoring Report. (2011, 2010, 2009). Equality Monitoring Report. Retrieved from: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/equalops/eo_data/

GOV UK. (July, 2010). Phasing out the Default Retirement Age. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31485/10-1047-default-retirement-age-consultation.pdf

Higher Education Statistics Agency. (2013). Staff Introduction 2011/12. Retrieved from: http://www.hesa.ac.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2729&Itemid=278

Independent (May, 2013). The University of Warwick. Retrieved from: http://www.independent.co.uk/student/into-university/az-uni-colleges/warwick-university-of-459106.html

Mental Health Foundation. (2013). Mental health statistics. Retrieved from: http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/help-information/mental-health-statistics/

Office of National Statistics. (June, 2013). UK employment up 24,000 on the quarter and 432,000 on the year. Retrieved from: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/june-2013/sty-uk-employment.html

56

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/june-2013/sty-uk-employment.html

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/june-2013/sty-uk-employment.html

http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/help-information/mental-health-statistics/

http://www.independent.co.uk/student/into-university/az-uni-colleges/warwick-university-of-459106.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/student/into-university/az-uni-colleges/warwick-university-of-459106.html

http://www.hesa.ac.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2729&Itemid=278

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31485/10-1047-default-retirement-age-consultation.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31485/10-1047-default-retirement-age-consultation.pdf

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/equalops/eo_data/

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/advice-and-guidance/your-rights/disability/

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/insite/news/intnews2/equality_diversity_training_aug12

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/employing-disabled-people-and-people-with-health-conditions/employing-disabled-people-and-people-with-health-conditions

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/employing-disabled-people-and-people-with-health-conditions/employing-disabled-people-and-people-with-health-conditions

http://www.coventry.gov.uk/downloads/file/4633/coventry_people_and__age

http://www.coventry.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/4635/coventry_people_and__gender_sex

http://www.coventry.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/4635/coventry_people_and__gender_sex

http://www.coventry.gov.uk/downloads/file/4639/coventry_people_and__race_and_ethnicity


Office of National Statistics. (September, 2013). Women make up a third of UK managers. Retrieved from: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lmac/women-in-the-labour-market/2013/sty-women-in-work.html

Office of National Statistics. (June, 2013). Labour Market Statistics. Retrieved from: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_312067.pdf

Research Excellence Framework. (2012). Research Excellence Framework. Retrieved from: http://www.ref.ac.uk/

University of Warwick Equal Pay Review 2011. Retrieved from: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/equalops/equal_pay_review_2011/27f-l9_pay_equity_summary_publnappvd.pdf

57

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/equalops/equal_pay_review_2011/27f-l9_pay_equity_summary_publnappvd.pdf

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/equalops/equal_pay_review_2011/27f-l9_pay_equity_summary_publnappvd.pdf

http://www.ref.ac.uk/

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lmac/women-in-the-labour-market/2013/sty-women-in-work.html

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lmac/women-in-the-labour-market/2013/sty-women-in-work.html

Introduction - Welcome to the University of Warwick · Web viewThis report provides information on...

Documents

Transcript of Introduction - Welcome to the University of Warwick · Web viewThis report provides information on...